Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,151,790 members, 7,813,616 topics. Date: Tuesday, 30 April 2024 at 02:56 PM

Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? (837 Views)

What Did Paul Mean When He Referred To The "Lawless One" Also As "Man Of Sin"? / The Biblical Jesus Referred To The Gentiles As 'dogs' / Joshua Bamiloye Mike: The Movie “Lucifer” Used By Devil To Win Souls (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (Reply) (Go Down)

Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 9:52am On Apr 07
I've got my reservations about the English Bible, I don't know if it's a tool of manipulation by some kings and rulers of the ancient British kingdom. I have done deep research on the subject matter and have discovered that the move by translators of the Greek Bible to English is shrouded with a lot of secrets and politics, starting with the execution of the English translator of the Bible William Tyndale by King Henry VIII after he tagged Tyndale's translation as Heresy. (more emphasis in comment section)

Read: 2nd Peter 1 vs 19 of the Latin Bible...

Latin: et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris

Google Translate: and we have a firmer prophetic message to which you are doing well, attending to it like a lamp shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the lucifer rises in your hearts

English Bible: 2 Peter 1:19 in Other Translations

19 • Because of that experience, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets. You must pay close attention to what they wrote, for their words are like a lamp shining in a dark place—until the Day dawns, and Christ the Morning Star shines in your hearts.

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 10:03am On Apr 07
Read: https://www.worldhistory.org/William_Tyndale/

Who was Williams Tyndale? Was he the first one to translate the Bible, not King James, into English?
Tyndale gave us the third English translation of the Bible. King James authorized the 12th English translation. Here is a brief synopsis of each:

1. Wyclif’s Bible, Early Version EV (1380) by John Wycliffe. Wycliffe’s first version is a literal word for word translation of the Vulgate for use in canon law. Translated by Henry Hargreaves, John Purvey, and other followers of John Wycliffe.

2. Wycliffe’s Bible, Late Version LV (1388) by John Wycliffe. Wycliffe’s second translation used a meaning for meaning translation, rather than word for word. This effort to translate the Bible into English for the common believer defied church authorities. Later his bones were exhumed and posthumously burned along with copies of his translation.

3. Tyndale Bible (1526) by William Tyndale. Tyndale continued Wycliffe’s defiance of church authorities with this first New Testament in English, printed at Worms. (Wycliffe’s Bibles were hand-written, not printed.) Tyndale translated Erasmus’s Greek New Testament while using Luther’s German translation for reference. Tyndale’s order of the New Testament followed that of Martin Luther, who set apart Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. The Lord Chancellor, Thomas More, attacked Tyndale’s New Testament as heretical. Tyndale translated most of the Old Testament before his execution for heresy on October 6, 1536.

4. Coverdale Bible (1535) by Myles Coverdale. Coverdale translated the Bible from German and Latin. It was the first complete Bible printed in English and it had the informal approval of King Henry VIII. Coverdale’s Bible was the first in English to set apart the Apocrypha as an appendix following the Luther’s example. Today Tyndale and Coverdale are honored with religious publishing houses in their name.

5. Matthew’s Bible (1537) by Thomas Matthew. Matthew is probably the penname for John Rogers, a follower of Tyndale. Matthew’s Bible was the first in English printed with royal license. It included the “Prayer of Manasseh” for the first time in English. Matthew’s Bible essentially was the same as Tyndale’s Bible, but Tyndale was still considered a heretic.

6. Great Bible or Whitchurch Bible (1539) by Myles Coverdale. Thomas Cromwell contracted with Coverdale to produce a new Bible, revising the Matthew Bible. It restored the New Testament order of the Vulgate rather than Luther’s order. In 1546, King Henry VIII proclaimed that all copies of Tyndale’s Bible and Coverdale’s Bible were to be burned, leaving the Great Bible as the only official Bible allowed by the church and the king.

7. Taverner’s Bible (1539) by Richard Taverner. Taverner revised Matthew’s Bible using a more accurate collated Greek New Testament. He listed four books of Kings, rather than 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings. His sponsor was Thomas Cromwell. While his scholarship was good, Tavernor fell out of favor when Cromwell lost his position.

8. Becke’s Bible (1551) by Edmune Becke. Becke merged Taverner’s Old Testament and Tyndale’s New Testament. While Tyndale’s New Testament was well written, Tyndale’s name was considered scandalous. The popularity of Becke’s Bible quickly faded to the popularity of the Geneva Bible and the Bishop’s Bible.

9. Geneva Bible (1560) by William Whittingham. The New Testament was produced in 1557 and the Old Testament in 1560. Considered the Bible of the Protestant Reformation, it was inspired by John Knox and John Calvin. Whittingham began a fresh translation from the Greek while others began a fresh translation of the Old Testament. Tyndale provided an overall guide. This version became very popular for Protestants in England and Europe. Because of fear of persecution, the Protestant sponsors published it in Switzerland. The use of chapter and verse numbers was first seen in a printed Bible in the Geneva Bible. Rabbi Nathan made the Old Testament divisions in 1448. Robert Estienne made the New Testament divisions in 1555.

10. Bishop’s Bible (1568) by Matthew Parker. To compete with the Geneva Bible, Archbishop Matthew Parker edited a thorough revision of the Great Bible using the more accurate Greek texts used by the Geneva Bible.

11. Douay-Rheims Bible (1609) by George Martin. The New Testament was published at Rheims in 1582, and the Old Testament was published at Douay in 1609. This translation of the Vulgate included extensive notes arguing the Catholic perspective in the face of the Protestant revolt. This became the official Catholic translation until the 20th century.

12. King James Version KJV (1611) edited and translated by Richard Bancroft, Lancelot Andrewes, Edward Lively, John Harding, Thomas Ravid, William Barlow, and John Duport, with William Bedwell, Richard Clark, Geoffrey King, John Layfield, John Overall, Hadrian a Saravia, Richard Thompson, Robert Tighe, Roger Andrews, Andrew Bing, Laurence Chadderton, Thomas Harrison, John Richardson, Robert Spalding, Richard Brett, Richard Fairclough, Thomas Holland, Richard Kilby, John Reynolds, Miles Smith, George Abbott, John Aglionby, Richard Eedes, John Harmer, James Montague, John Perin, Ralph Ravens, Sir Henry Savile, Giles Thomson, William Dakins, Roger Fenton, Ralph Hutchinson, Michael Rabbert, Thomas Sanderson, John Spencer, John Boys, William Branthwaite, Andrew Downes, Jeremiah Radcliffe, Robert Ward, and Samuel Ward. Completed by 48 scholars under the authority of the Church of England and the newly crowned King James. The translators consulted with the following English versions: Bishops’ Bible, Tyndale’s Bible, Matthew’s Bible, Coverdale’s Bible, The Great Bible or Whitchurch’s Bible, and the Geneva Bible. Unlike the previous translations, editorial notes were forbidden. Previously, such notes had been used to advance theological agenda, which lead to those translations being burned. It is still one of the best selling and most popular English translations available. Despite the fact that more accurate Greek and Hebrew texts have become available since 1611, fans of this translation are legion. The original King James Version included the Catholic Apocrypha.

2 Likes 1 Share

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by nairalanda1(m): 10:06am On Apr 07
Yeah, if I call someone Christopher and someone else is also called Christopher it don't mean they are the same person

8 Likes 1 Share

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by muyico(m): 10:12am On Apr 07
the throne Lucifer is occupying b4 in heaven, but chased out from heaven, Jesus Christ is occupying d title and throne now! read revelation 22 till end

2 Likes 2 Shares

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 10:20am On Apr 07
muyico:
the throne Lucifer is occupying b4 in heaven, but chased out from heaven, Jesus Christ is occupying d title and throne now! read revelation 22 till end
What throne, where did you get that information?

2 Likes 1 Share

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by judatech: 10:25am On Apr 07
So so much we don't know and may never know

1 Like

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by SayGod: 10:26am On Apr 07
simply because he is lucifer
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by muyico(m): 10:28am On Apr 07
MadeINchenzen2:
What throne, where did you get that information?
· The ESV calls him the Day Star, son of Dawn. The bright (and) morning star is reserved for Jesus (Revelation, 22:16).
If the 'Morning Star' in Isaiah 14:12 is referring ... - Quora
Is Jesus the same person as Lucifer, for they are both ...
How can Satan be 'the shining morning star' of ...
In Revelation 22:16 NIV Jesus calls himself ...
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by naptu2: 10:28am On Apr 07
Venus, the morning star (light bringer). No capitalisation.

1 Like

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 10:54am On Apr 07
SayGod:
simply because he is lucifer
And who did the English Bible refer to as 'Lucifer'?
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Leo34rf(f): 10:55am On Apr 07
I don't subscribe to any god that deals in blood, especially innocent blood. Those are demonic beings, so a lot of them popular religions out for me.

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by SayGod: 11:55am On Apr 07
MadeINchenzen2:
And who did the English Bible refer to as 'Lucifer'?

son of light
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 12:11pm On Apr 07
SayGod:


son of light
what verse?
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by DMerciful(m): 1:13pm On Apr 07
Google translate isnt very accurate, is it?
MadeINchenzen2:
I've got my reservations about the English Bible, I don't know if it's a tool of manipulation by some kings and rulers of the ancient British kingdom. I have done deep research on the subject matter and have discovered that the move by translators of the Greek Bible to English is shrouded with a lot of secrets and politics, starting with the execution of the English translator of the Bible William Tyndale by King Henry VIII after he tagged Tyndale's translation as Heresy. (more emphasis in comment section)

Read: 2nd Peter 1 vs 19 of the Latin Bible...

Latin: et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris

Google Translate: and we have a firmer prophetic message to which you are doing well, attending to it like a lamp shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the lucifer rises in your hearts

English Bible: 2 Peter 1:19 in Other Translations

19 • Because of that experience, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets. You must pay close attention to what they wrote, for their words are like a lamp shining in a dark place—until the Day dawns, and Christ the Morning Star shines in your hearts.
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Dsimmer: 1:28pm On Apr 07
Lucifer means son of light or morning star. That was what was used to describe Human who are the image of God.

That was why the scripture says "oh Lucifer, how are that fallen, you son of morning star". That particular scripture was talking about the Hebrews/Isrealites when they sinned but on a larger scale, it was also talking about the fall of the first man. Hence, the coming of Jesus represented the first man on earth thus the need to fulfill the law which has no mercy, therefore, he had to die to pay the price of the sinner or the sin of the first man. However, he triumphed over the law by his resurrection. Thus meaning mercy abounds for everyone because if Jesus could obtain mercy after representing the sinner at the face of the law which has no mercy, then mercy abounds for everyone in the face of the law because it's now Jesus who justifies. That was why it was stated that Jesus paid the price of the sinner. However, it doesn't mean one should continue to do evil because sooner or later, you will reap it. Just like Paul stated, "you can't continue in sin yet expect grace to abound"

3 Likes

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by SayGod: 1:29pm On Apr 07
MadeINchenzen2:
what verse?

Read the full bible
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Melagros(m): 2:57pm On Apr 07
COMRADES, we're here to learn cool
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Iamanoited: 4:42pm On Apr 07
SayGod:
simply because he is lucifer


Yes, common matches.
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 4:43pm On Apr 07
Dsimmer:
Lucifer means son of light or morning star. That was what was used to describe Human who are the image of God.

That was why the scripture says "oh Lucifer, how are that fallen, you son of morning star". That particular scripture was talking about the Hebrews/Isrealites when they sinned but on a larger scale, it was also talking about the fall of the first man. Hence, the coming of Jesus represented the first man on earth thus the need to fulfill the law which has no mercy, therefore, he had to die to pay the price of the sinner or the sin of the first man. However, he triumphed over the law by his resurrection. Thus meaning mercy abounds for everyone because if Jesus could obtain mercy after representing the sinner at the face of the law which has no mercy, then mercy abounds for everyone in the face of the law because it's now Jesus who justifies. That was why it was stated that Jesus paid the price of the sinner. However, it doesn't mean one should continue to do evil because sooner or later, you will reap it. Just like Paul stated, "you can't continue in sin yet expect grace to abound"
Are you confused or what?
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 4:44pm On Apr 07
SayGod:


son of light
Are you confused or what?
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Dsimmer: 4:44pm On Apr 07
MadeINchenzen2:
Are you confused or what?

You're rather dumb
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Iamanoited: 4:53pm On Apr 07
Nice piece.
However, it is relevant to note that the SPIRIT of JESUS, LUCIFER, 444, MORNING STAR was a REFERENCE BY MANY SCHOLARS TO A COMMON SYMBOL IN THE HEBREW SCROLL.


Orisa37
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 5:14pm On Apr 07
Dsimmer:


You're rather dumb
Are you confused or what?
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by muyico(m): 5:25pm On Apr 07
[quote au thor=MadeINchenzen2 post=129309241]What throne, where did you get that information?[/quote] I quoted u b4! morning 🌟 is a title and there is throne assign to it,, after Lucifer rebel, he was chase from heaven to pit of earth, so the throne and title was given to Jesus Christ bcus he defeat him! revelation 22:16!
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by muyico(m): 5:28pm On Apr 07
[quote author=MadeINchenzen2 post=129309241]What throne, where did you get that information?[/ 31 Dec 2022 · The ESV calls him the Day Star, son of Dawn. The bright (and) morning star is reserved for Jesus (Revelation, 22:16).
If the 'Morning Star' in Isaiah 14:12 is referring ... - Quora
Is Jesus the same person as Lucifer, for they are both ...
How can Satan be 'the shining morning star' of ...
In Revelation 22:16 NIV Jesus calls himself ... - Quora
More results from www.quora.com ]
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by MadeINchenzen2: 6:56pm On Apr 07
muyico:
I quoted u b4! morning 🌟 is a title and there is throne assign to it,, after Lucifer rebel, he was chase from heaven to pit of earth, so the throne and title was given to Jesus Christ bcus he defeat him! revelation 22:16!
This is the funniest piece I've read on nairaland since 2005

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by AcadaWriter: 8:21pm On Apr 07
Fergie001 Nlfpmod
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Samunique(m): 9:07pm On Apr 07
judatech:
So so much we don't know and may never know
Don't get yourself confused, the word Lucifer which means the morning or shining star came into existence when the Hebrew scriptures were translated into the greek language which was called Septuagint.

This word first appeared in Isaiah 14:12, but the original Hebrew word used there was Helel which the Greek translator translated as Lucifer, that's how the word Lucifer came into existence.

Though the word Helel is somehow similar in meaning with the Greek word Lucifer which means "day star".

Just like the word Elohim is used both for Yahweh and other gods even man in the Bible, does it make us doubt Yahweh as the only true one God?
NO......And that doesn't make our God a false God as well.

Therefore, calling Our Lord Jesus Christ Lucifer doesn't make Him the devil, it's just a Greek word for Daystar , infact the title Morningstar/Daystar does not belong to the devil anymore, it belongs to Christ.

Don't suspect anything, no one is hiding anything from you, it's a Greek word which was translated appropriately to the word morning star, Daystar........

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Kobojunkie: 4:55am On Apr 08
MadeINchenzen2:
Read: https://www.worldhistory.org/William_Tyndale/
Read
In Roman folklore, Lucifer ("light-bringer" in Latin) was the name of the planet Venus, though it was often personified as a male figure bearing a torch. The Greek name for this planet was variously Phosphoros (also meaning "light-bringer"wink or Heosphoros (meaning "dawn-bringer"wink. Lucifer was said to be "the fabled son of Aurora and Cephalus, and father of Ceyx". He was often presented in poetry as heralding the dawn.
The Latin word corresponding to the Greek Phosphorus is Lucifer. It is used in its astronomical sense both in prose and poetry. Poets sometimes personify the star, placing it in a mythological context.

Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Kobojunkie: 5:19am On Apr 08
Samunique:
■ Don't get yourself confused, the word Lucifer which means the morning or shining star came into existence when the Hebrew scriptures were translated into the greek language which was called Septuagint. This word first appeared in Isaiah 14:12, but the original Hebrew word used there was [b]Helel which the Greek translator translated as Lucifer, that's how the word Lucifer came into existence. [/b] Though the word Helel is somehow similar in meaning with the Greek word Lucifer which means "day star".
Just like the word Elohim is used both for Yahweh and other gods even man in the Bible, does it make us doubt Yahweh as the only true one God?
■ NO......And that doesn't make our God a false God as well. Therefore, calling Our Lord Jesus Christ Lucifer doesn't make Him the devil, it's just a Greek word for Daystar , infact the title Morningstar/Daystar does not belong to the devil anymore, it belongs to Christ. Don't suspect anything, no one is hiding anything from you, it's a Greek word which was translated appropriately to the word morning star, Daystar........
The Hebrew word mistranslated to Lucifer in Isaiah 14 vs 12 instead means Dawn, and it a used as a reference to the King of Babylon — not a devil or even the devil—, the one to whom the dirge was sung about- Isaiah 14 vs 4.

2. The devil was never a light bringer nor a Morning star. Jesus Christ is the only Lightbringer — Phosphorus — recorded in Scripture. He is the light to shine in all who belong to Him and obey Him — those who love Him. In Revelation 22 vs 6, John records in his book of Revelations that Jesus Christ declared Himself the brighter morning star. undecided
Re: Why Was Christ Referred To As Lucifer In The Latin Bible? by Samunique(m): 9:11am On Apr 08
Kobojunkie:
The Hebrew word mistranslated to Lucifer in Isaiah 14 vs 12 instead means Dawn, and it a used as a reference to the King of Babylon — not a devil or even the devil—, the one to whom the dirge was sung about- Isaiah 14 vs 4.

2. The devil was never a light bringer nor a Morning star. Jesus Christ is the only Lightbringer — Phosphorus — recorded in Scripture. He is the light to shine in all who belong to Him and obey Him — those who love Him. In Revelation 22 vs 6, John records in his book of Revelations that Jesus Christ declared Himself the brighter morning star. undecided

(1) (2) (Reply)

Are You In The Race Also? / Fair Or Not / Seek Ye First The Kingdom Of God And :

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 79
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.